From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1F4j4u-0001lJ-7j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:21:08 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k12IImSb031370; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 18:18:48 GMT Received: from mail.epproach.net (mail.epproach.net [64.192.56.25]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k12IIlBn012848 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 18:18:47 GMT Received: (qmail 7024 invoked by uid 210); 2 Feb 2006 13:18:46 -0500 Received: from 64.192.55.242 by mail (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.88/1266. f-prot: 4.5.4/3.16.6. spamassassin: 3.0.4. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:1(64.192.55.242):. Processed in 0.025389 secs); 02 Feb 2006 18:18:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?64.192.55.242?) (64.192.55.242) by 0 with SMTP; 2 Feb 2006 13:18:46 -0500 Subject: Re: [gentoo-hardened] Problems compiling xen - please help... From: Ned Ludd To: gentoo-hardened@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <43E24869.9080303@wildgooses.com> References: <43E21F59.9070709@wildgooses.com> <20060202183402.5be7ea34@c1358217.kevquinn.com> <43E246DC.3090006@wildgooses.com> <43E24869.9080303@wildgooses.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:18:46 -0500 Message-Id: <1138904326.16448.3.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-hardened@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-hardened@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8bcb9729-0572-4b42-a90a-ce9e4a9960dd X-Archives-Hash: dcf37d1870376fcf655485a5eb6133f0 On Thu, 2006-02-02 at 17:59 +0000, Ed W wrote: > > Thanks for everyones responses, but this is what I already tried!!! > > > > When I switch compiler using gcc-config (see previous email for > > example command line) then there NO DIFFERENCE in compiled output!?! > > > > Does this suggest that something screwy is happening and it's not > > really changing the compiler in the way I expect? "gcc -v" is > > changing though... > > > > Whoooa. Hold that thought. On a sudden realisation I tried blowing > away the ccache directory and switched to hardened_nopiessp and it then > built correctly... Very strange. > > I was under the mistaken believe that ccache could detect when the > compiler was switched and would not re-use it's old cache files. > Certainly it was taking different amounts of time to compile when I > changed compiler versus re-running under the orig compiler config. > Obviously the cache algorithm is not perfect though. > > Heads up then that when switching compiler to the non-hardened one it > makes sense to blow away the ccache of disable it's use. That probably makes sense for any time a gcc-config switch happens. You should probably file a bug about that for the maintainer of gcc-config. -- Ned Ludd Gentoo Linux -- gentoo-hardened@gentoo.org mailing list